Tek-Tips is the largest IT community on the Internet today!
Members share and learn making Tek-Tips Forums the best source of peer-reviewed technical information on the Internet!
-
Congratulations TugboatEng on being selected by the Eng-Tips community for having the most helpful posts in the forums last week. Way to Go!
Which is easier to learn, PIC or Z8 ?
- Thread starter nbucska
- Start date
It certainly isn't because of the elegance of its assembly language.
I think grotesque sums that up.
I programmed a Holtek microcontroller that was very similar in architecture to the PIC, but had the decided advantage of a reasonably thought out set of assembler instructions without the nonsensical Flag.
As a processor the PIC is reasonable (ish). Pity about the banked memory though.
rgds
Zeit.
I think grotesque sums that up.
I programmed a Holtek microcontroller that was very similar in architecture to the PIC, but had the decided advantage of a reasonably thought out set of assembler instructions without the nonsensical Flag.
As a processor the PIC is reasonable (ish). Pity about the banked memory though.
rgds
Zeit.
cbarn24050
Industrial
Hi, what dont you like about the pic assembly lang? I'd like to hear any improvements you could suggest, given that you only have 14 bits to play with.
- Thread starter
- #6
I can't really compare the PIC with the Z8 coz I've never programmed a Z8, but there seems to be a PIC for all seasons.
MPASM is free download from the Microchip site.
At one variety per line, the PICs take up 26 pages in the Farnell catalogue.
Z8s take up 4 pages.
You can build a pic programmer for about $10 with designs all over the web.
The Z8 emulator & tools seem very reasonably priced.
At a guess, you pays your money & takes your choice.
rgds
Zeit.
MPASM is free download from the Microchip site.
At one variety per line, the PICs take up 26 pages in the Farnell catalogue.
Z8s take up 4 pages.
You can build a pic programmer for about $10 with designs all over the web.
The Z8 emulator & tools seem very reasonably priced.
At a guess, you pays your money & takes your choice.
rgds
Zeit.
Skogsgurra
Electrical
I think that I would look at capabilities, varieties, pricing and popularity first. Both processors are quite easy to master and both are quite old architectures (remember that the PIC was the Programmable Interface Controller for CA computers back in the seventies and that the Z8 was born about the same time). I have dropped the Z8 for many reasons (but still do MCS-51 and -96 work now and then) and go for the PIC family in most cases.
I have used the Z8 for many years and found it quite easy. (I even wrote a floating point package for it.) My guess is that it depends on what processors you are used to when it comes to learning another one. It in no way resembles the Z80 family architecture except for the choice of mnemonic spellings. It is my understanding that the PIC is more limited in its stack and jumps but may be faster on a per instruction basis. If that is the case, then the PIC is a better choice for fast bit level control and the Z8 better for more complex control applications. Also look at power if that is important to the application.
I use both PIC and Zilog products (actually using the eZ80 in a couple of things, haven't used the Z8 itself in years) and I'd have to say I much prefer the Zilog.
There's nothing really all that "wrong" with the PICs in my opinion, I just don't actually "like" them very much.
A primary consideration these days has to be the cost of development tools and the ease of bringing a product to prototype quickly. Tools available free of charge or at a very low cost assist this. Also products that provide in circuit programming and background debug are in my view essential (spent years fiddling with hugely expensive ICE and am glad I don't have to any more).
We're using flash based PICs in a couple of products that require very low cost and simple functionality. These prodcts have very specific functionality so I can write the code, test it thoroughly, then never need to go near it again (hopefully!!). PICs are great for this kind of thing. Whenever I have to develop one of these I put my PIC head on, eventually get my fingers to type the correct syntax, eventually remember which registers are in which block and quite rapidly get the code to work with the help of the simulator.
Anything that looks like the software could develop over time or where I believe I'm going to be into a bit of code re-use, or even when I think the code could get complicated, I move over to Zilog. The tools are pretty reasonable (now I'm used to where the bugs are), they didn't cost much either and I don't have any of the limitations I have with the PIC. I know I've got the performance to get me out of a hole if I find myself having to do some heavy processing, I know I'm not going to run out of code space or RAM too quickly and the background debug means I can test in real time on the real hardware.
I comment like crazy and write extensive design documents for every piece of software I write, not because we have company procedures that require it (which we do, written by me and enforced on the other guys who write code) but mostly because I have a terrible memory and find it really hard to remember why I did things a particular way. Even so, I still find it hard to pick up the PIC and just start writing code without looking at some code first to remind myself of the syntax.
I've been writing code on zilog products for over 20 years. I don't see me stopping any time soon.
There's nothing really all that "wrong" with the PICs in my opinion, I just don't actually "like" them very much.
A primary consideration these days has to be the cost of development tools and the ease of bringing a product to prototype quickly. Tools available free of charge or at a very low cost assist this. Also products that provide in circuit programming and background debug are in my view essential (spent years fiddling with hugely expensive ICE and am glad I don't have to any more).
We're using flash based PICs in a couple of products that require very low cost and simple functionality. These prodcts have very specific functionality so I can write the code, test it thoroughly, then never need to go near it again (hopefully!!). PICs are great for this kind of thing. Whenever I have to develop one of these I put my PIC head on, eventually get my fingers to type the correct syntax, eventually remember which registers are in which block and quite rapidly get the code to work with the help of the simulator.
Anything that looks like the software could develop over time or where I believe I'm going to be into a bit of code re-use, or even when I think the code could get complicated, I move over to Zilog. The tools are pretty reasonable (now I'm used to where the bugs are), they didn't cost much either and I don't have any of the limitations I have with the PIC. I know I've got the performance to get me out of a hole if I find myself having to do some heavy processing, I know I'm not going to run out of code space or RAM too quickly and the background debug means I can test in real time on the real hardware.
I comment like crazy and write extensive design documents for every piece of software I write, not because we have company procedures that require it (which we do, written by me and enforced on the other guys who write code) but mostly because I have a terrible memory and find it really hard to remember why I did things a particular way. Even so, I still find it hard to pick up the PIC and just start writing code without looking at some code first to remind myself of the syntax.
I've been writing code on zilog products for over 20 years. I don't see me stopping any time soon.
Hi, I am studing the possibility to use the Z8 in a little project. I have not found, in the literature, the way to download the code to brand new chip (DIP40). Someone has working with these devices? A light in the road will be appreciate.
AUlloa.
AUlloa.
I would recommend looking at the Atmel AVR family of processors. I agree that the PIC assembly language is attrocious and seems to be getting worse. I hate the branching facility. Finding the AVR was like stepping into Shang-ri-la after using the PIC stuff for so long. I think that the Basic, C, and other compilers are better quality than what I've seen for the PIC. I also like using the peripherals much better!
- Status
